ABC Celebrities

What about those salaries for the ABC TV personalities released recently, it makes me a bit sick to think the taxpayer's money is going to huge salaries to keep tired opinions half the population does not agree with. Simply it is not the purpose of the ABC (or SBS).

This is taxpayer money.... and considering most of them seem very biased in their presentation of news (towards the left) they must not be being paid for journalism but instead some concept of popular media format of delivering personality opinions of the news.

Tony Jones, Lateline/Q&A; $355,789 a year
Juanita Phillips, news presenter; $316,454
Quentin Dempster, current affairs presenter; $291,505
Leigh Sales, current affairs presenter; $280,400
Chris Uhlmann, political editor; $255,400
Fran Kelly, radio presenter; $255,000
Barrie Cassidy, political/misc host; $243,478
Virginia Trioli, morning show host; $235,664
Annabel Crabb, interview host; $217,426

Now if anyone has ever watched the ABC, and was honest, arent all those headlining 'celebrities' dyed in the wool ALP supporters!!!!? Some of them cannot even talk to a Liberal person without clenching their teeth and bending their cleft notes.

I guess my main concern is that the taxpayer is making celebrities out of them and keeping them for their opinions when the purpose of 'all' those jobs listed there is for unbiased journalism and news.

It is not rocket science, and indeed it would be quite an easy job. It's not a commercial TV station where experience translates into culture, which directly associates to revenue based on that stations culture being popular or not. Should the taxpayer be funding the development of 'celebrities' and if so, should they be clear with their political preference so balance can be achieved!?

Figures from;
http://www.news.com.au/money/money-...c-stars-salaries/story-e6frfmd9-1226764149242

 

I read the ABC costs us 8c a day. That's good value to me.

Rad Hadley earns $2.5 million... y'know, just to get it in perspective and stuff. Is he an unbiased fella? Presenting unbiased commentary for his $2.5 million?

Right now everyone on the forum should disclose how much they earn and who they work for... and then we'll pick you to bits...

Seriously, big whoop. Whoever leaked it is some big loser. Hope they find the person and sack them.

 

What does Alan Jones earn? $4, 5 million?

Now there's a man that adds value and educates.

 

Well, the thing is Gwendolyn, that you see the world as socialist or capitalist, black or white. The world is not like that. For the taxpayer to compulsorily pay anything at all for a political mouthpiece is unjust; an imposition that is resented by a lot of people.

 

Well said! It was completely silly to even bring this to light. They will probably tell us that the Haddley's, jones' and Bolts operate solely without sponsorship from vested interests. ABC is funded by government but has to be neutral! I mean Abbott is the big man overseeing this service, so wouldn't you expect for them to provide a conservative slant to his liking.........no!.....they simply aren't manipulated to provide lies, due to the nature of its funding. The best place to find the truth is the ABC!

 

Earth to Mars...... the ABC is taxpayer funded, hence my question. Perhaps you did not read the OP and instead are ranting on the release of the figures, which is sort of irrelevant, but thanks for showing your colours again.

- - - Updated - - -

Well said? LOL
Same thing...... the point is the ABC is taxpayer funded, omg.
Cannot you see beyond your bias lefties and understand what is being said!?

 

I believe the ABC is a quality network. Well worth my 8c.

Exactly how much do you want these ABC staff to earn? How do their salaries compare to commercial station salaries?

As Will Anderson says:

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/medi...tors-at-bay-20131120-2xvq8.html#ixzz2lSyIzFXj

 

Science - CUT FUNDING!

ABC - CUT FUNDING!

Military equipment - JUST GIVE IT AWAY FOR FREE TO SRI LANKA!

 

It may actually be you showing your colours again.

How much would you like to set their salaries at? Maybe you could get that 8c a day dropped down to 5c or something.

Me, I'm not ranting, but your OP passes for one.

"Comparitive salaries" is worth addressing... How do their salaries stack up against commercial network salaries? No doubt they're well below commercial station salaries so why the grumble?

Me, I think Alan Jones earning $4 million for his potty mouth is obscene....

 

I see were your coming from and I would agree that the bias of the ABC at present is a bit over the top. BUT I still consider that they are no worse than their competitors. Some want to continue to complain about the bias of others such as Alan Jones but in another 12 to 18 months will be championing has words against the current government. After all they are shock jocks and are paid to biased against government, there is not much reason to be against the opposition, as they really have not the ability to do anything much.

But I am surprised they remain so noticeably bias after the election, to me that makes statement that the Coalition is prepared to allow the ABC to work autonomously compared to other parties. This should be championed as this clearly demonstrates that the current government is not going to tell the ABC what to report...

 

Just to get it in perspective with other salaries, and this article was 2 years ago:

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...s-700000-pay-day/story-e6frfmyi-1226076023636

And poor Kyle wanting his lowly $2 million dollar salary doubled to $4 million.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...million-pay-rise/story-e6frg6n6-1226751016490


And, oh, no!! Tony Jones earns $355,000.

Get it in perspective, folks.

 

Who's interests are the ABC representing? I think they have an agenda to tell the truth without manipulative money, which consequently may come across as leftist to some. I suppose others would argue this! I would say they simply report the truth, which tends to favour what you may think is a leftist slant, but it is just representing the truth. They are our best source of honest reporting because they aren't manipulated by vested interests???? It's a silly argument, whichever way you look at it. You've gotta do a little better than this for goodness sake! It is tax payers money, not labor's, not liberals......strange!

 

For me, there is a difference between unbiased and autonomous journalism, and rudeness and disrespectful journalism.

The ABC journalists have these questionable qualities in spades, and demonstrate them on a regular basis, when they interview ALP politicians and LNP politicians.

The ABC regularly advocate they hold themselves to a higher standard of journalistic ethics over people like; Ray Hadley and Alan Jones, but I personally don’t think ABC journalists are any better or any different.

I have watched ABC journalists conduct interviews with ALP & LNP politicians, and the different styles is very noticeable.

 

The question I would ask, are these people, or these positions worth such huge salaries? $120K being pulled by mine workers is nothing compared to these ABC indentities yet people on this forum have implied many times they think that mine workers are overpaid.

 

Just my personal opinion, but I don't think any parrot sitting in a cage asking the same mindless questions, and never getting answers, is worth a $200K plus tax payer funded salary.

Lets be ralistic for a change. I have heard 10 year olds ask more indepth and intelligent questions about politicians and policies, than some ABC journalists. Maybe the 10 year olds should be getting the $200K plus salaries, and the ABC journalists go back to primary school.

 

Entertainment industry salaries are massively top heavy, of course they don't deserve what they're being paid, neither do a lot of tradies (especially in the mining industry), neither do most people in finance, neither do most CEOs, board members, etc, etc.

The idea that people get paid what they're "worth", or that monetary reparation is a direct indication of an individuals contribution to society, is frankly a whole lot of naive bs.

If the ABC is going to exist and compete with the commercial stations, then it will have to have vaguely comparable salaries.

 

What a large load of crap... Tell the truth??? No, they too have been found to manufacturing stories to what ends??? BUT, who really cares??? There is enough bias media out there for either party, what interests me is the ABC is usually bias toward the sitting government, no matter who they are. BUT this time they appear to be happy to be seen to lead the opposite way. Still I agree that it is silly, if one wants to complain about bias then it should have cross the board action (which is near impossible without completely controlling the media)

If we want to demand that people are paid their worth in the workforce, Australians would lose half (if not more) of the workers. It would be good to expect performance based wages, but reality is that will never happen... We have wages based on need. If there is any hope of reasonable reporting the ABC needs to pay comparatively similar salaries to the rest of the media groups or they will lose any quality they have. Comparing them to people such as others who do different things in the media is simply ludicrous.

 

Well that is fair enough, But I must say that while I agree with your premise that mass media is politically potent in Australia because it is clear that people would rather take the word of articles as verbatim rather than find the truth in articles. There are plenty of examples on this forum...

I also find it fair enough that you oppose the ABC's stance, for me I would wonder. With considerable amount of bias media in one direction would a fair balance be better. This however, assumes that people who gather their news look at many different media outlets reasonably not look to only that media that supports their own political persuasion. Again this also assumes that people look to see what information is true and what is trumped up to sell.

However, the statement of "No, they too have been found to manufacturing stories to what ends??? BUT, who really cares???" is made in sarcasm because obviously people still believe the reporters in the ABC are above reproach (which they are not.)

 

All right we agree.
Consider this; the public service should owe alegence to our head of state, the Queen. Therefore the ABC should be "above politics" as the Queen is. However the ABC is clearly not above politics. It is determinably for the Labor party and all points left of center. In fact the ABC displays alegence to socialist ideology and not the Queen. Welcome to the Socialist Republic of Australia.:thumbdown:

 

Again we agree. And I had mostly considered the ABC had preference to the government. BUT this maybe incorrect as I did not listen to them until recently so I take it as given that I was wrong on this.

 

If the ABC supports any current brand of politics it is Malcolm Turnbull's, he is the ABC's golden child. But really they just like charismatic politicians. They are certainly not "for" the ALP. There has been more reporting of ALP corruption and scandals on the ABC than on any other free to air channel, probably more than all the other channels combined. The ABC was highly critical of the Rudd and Gillard governments, as they were highly critical of Howard, and will be highly critical of Abbott. ABC interviewers are better and more belligerent than anyone on the commercial stations. It was always the commercial stations that fawned over Rudd with all their ridiculous morning TV programs, never the ABC.

 

Turnbull is a republican. Charismatic? For a purpose!
To be honest, really, I have never seen the ABC support anything right of centre. My perception is ingrained from my youth. In depth reporting of Labor corruption scandals serves to cleanse the ALP's image for the next election, countering the Murdoch press. That's my perception. Perhaps the ABC could try to change my perception. 😋🔊

 

There is far more left wing drivel on commercial TV, and they fawn over ALP politicians much more. "Interviews" on commercial TV's so called news programs are a complete joke. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that only ABC and SBS actually do any serious journalism out of the free-to-air channels. SBS is more left wing than ABC though imo. And, in 2009 ANU study of media bias found the ABC favoured the coalition. Generally it favours the government of the day, which is hardly surprising since the government is in control of the budget and more nonsense tends to come out of the mouths of Oppositions than Governments. If your perception of the ABC was based on the Hawk/Keating era, then it's hardly surprising that you think it favours the centre-left. Still, the ABC is closest thing you will get to "objective" TV News in Australia. Once again, the commercial channels are a complete joke when it comes to news and current affairs, the amount of commercial nonsense and cross promotion dressed up as "news" is amazing.

 

I agree with all that. I regularly watch SBS news and ABC only occasionally. Never watch commercial channels. Your answer is satisfactory. It's just a pity I don't run the ABC.😞